Conclusion

The use of cluster munitions in Georgia in August 2008
highlighted the danger of the weapons and the need to ban them. Both Russia and
Georgia launched cluster munition attacks yet came from different
positions—producer and importer, large stockpiler and small stockpiler,
repeat user and new user. In all, their cluster munition attacks caused the
death or injury of 70 civilians during and after the conflict as well as
ongoing socioeconomic harm.

Russia violated multiple provisions of international
humanitarian law with its use of cluster munitions. Its attacks in or near
villages, towns, and one city were inherently indiscriminate and thus unlawful.
They were also likely disproportionate. Human Rights Watch presumes that
cluster attacks in or near populated areas are disproportionate, and the lack
of evidence of Georgian troops in the vicinity combined with the foreseeable
civilian harm supports that presumption. Russian authorities continue to deny
they used cluster munitions in the course of the conflict.

Georgia also used cluster munitions that landed in or near
populated areas in the Gori District, but it said they were aiming at Russian
military personnel and equipment north of Tskhinvali. The possibility that the
Georgian weapons suffered a massive failure would explain why the cluster
munitions fell short, why they had such high failure rates, why so many
submunitions were unarmed, and why witnesses reported no Russian troops in the
vicinity of the strikes. Georgian authorities told Human Rights Watch they are
investigating what happened. Regardless of their conclusion, these incidents
underscore the unreliability and humanitarian risks of these weapons.

The use and effects of cluster munitions in this conflict
should serve as an impetus for all states to sign and ratify the Convention on
Cluster Munitions as soon as possible. Although not yet legally binding, the
fact that 96 states have signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions as of March
2009 demonstrates that there is widespread international support for its
principles. Russia and Georgia’s actions ignored this expression of
ever-increasing condemnation of the weapon. Looking to the future, they should
now not only become parties to the convention but also immediately comply with
its standards on clearance, risk education, and victim assistance. If they
cannot sign and ratify the convention at this point, they should establish
interim measures to reduce the humanitarian impact of cluster munitions. The
international community should strive to make the Georgian conflict the last in
which civilians lose both lives and livelihoods to this pernicious weapon.